Tension between posters. Yes! It goes like this. Some folks want to protect the status quo because it has been good to them. And they can envisage no other reality. Others are prepared to ignore the Thaksin TRT PPP negatives because when you’re in business you have to forge alliances regardless of whether you truly feel comfortable with them. Still others don’t really have an investment in either side and are quite prepared to sit and observe the two interests slug it out. One may not have a gun, but even the apparently passive observer has his anger at how the other two have the gall to try and monopolise everything that moves. My guess is some here are in a position where they have to take sides to protect their considerable investments of money, time and energy in this country. It isn’t pleasant to have to admit you have been laboring for years in vain. Which is why they have to pull off the hoary old commie-kicking stunt of calling somebody a PAD supporter.
Fantasy! I don’t think so! People don’t react to things so vigorously without some sort of reason. My reason is taking the occasional puff at those who think they their business is all that matters. It helps to relieve the tension.
If the PAD is going down that less democratic path, it seemed like a missed opportunity. They have done much in this new Thai phenomena of civic ultra-assertiveness and should continue to fight for, as they have in past occasions, against corruption, for political accountability, checks-and-balances…etc… They should especially advocate for the rule of law and set a good example by following the court’s order.
Is this a fear that, post-Thaksin (if the courts “do their job”), they’ll be no defining figure that generate so much emotion and political activism!? Hence the need to advocate elite control ‘sufficiency’ democracy – as Andrew terms it – which interestingly mirrors the ‘sufficiency’ rural constitution he blogged on recently (which is, at the end of the day, politics controlled by the capitalist-gangster elite). On that note, maybe PAD should take this new civic-assertiveness to the rural areas. If the country eventually gets a strong farmers’ political representation in parliament, even a truly, grass-roots farmer political party – that could be a truly new milestone in Thai democracy.
AjarnSomsak, 6 Tula 1976 is historically enmeshed in the United State’s global “containment” policy against Communism and the Thai State is formally backed by US intelligence (of whatever quality) and military aid in this war (as was the then South Vietnam government, Suharto etc.). As we know, millions have perished in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Indonesia etc. (I don’t know how many died in Thailand but as you compared Takbai etc. with Iraq, it probably pales in comparison to the broader war). In fact, monarchies (tied to their respective ‘state’) in Laos and Cambodia were dismantled as a result of this war. The Thai State (tied in with her own the monarchy) survived this war – clearly to your disappointment (and many others who devised the “Domino Theory” – but one only to delve into South East Asia’s colonial history, and the effects of “divide-and-rule” policy, to understand why).
Hence, my position that 1973, 1976, 1992, War on Drugs, Kruesue, Takbai, Sabah-Yoi are all state abuses, albeit under different and specific historical, political contexts . They are all injustices and it is hoped they are all redressed in some way in the present-future.
I understand that 6 Tula holds a very special place for you tied closely with your republican objectives for Thailand. From those analytical frames, everyone elses’ views is obviously “stupid”. Admittedly my views are framed by my own un-networked critical monarchist mindset.
It is rather interesting that Rabinowitz’s approach is still traditional human-less appraoch. I have been following forest conservation in Burma. Rabinowitz hasn’t been able to realize the importance of human survival, but he is only talking about the numbers of tigers. Zoa Noam’s articles in the Irrawaddy and elsewhere are good critiques of Ranbinowitz.
Burmese exiles are no different either. Arguments made by the exiles against conservation is that it generates revenue for the generals. But they rarely talk about the negative impacts of such conservation on local communities.
While not an Australian citizen, I was a resident there during Howard’s final term and got the opportunity to hear Michael Wesley from Griffith University present his (at the time) latest book The Howard Paradox: Australian Diplomacy in Asia 1996-2006 in which he argued that despite all expectations Australian Foreign Policy under Howard/Downer was not as disastrous as most had expected. He cited some items along the lines of Grasshoper’s points #s 1-3. He also noted that many Asians whose perspectives he surveyed still thought that the White Australia policy was still standing but that that this didn’t seem to actually cause any ripple to Australian foreign policy. It did seem at the time that he was using a narrow frame of Liberal Party values to assess the Howard/Downer foreign policy achievements. However, it may simply be that whether or not Downer did achieve anything depends on whether one shares Downer’s (Liberal Party) values and foreign policy aims.
I did post this article (appended below) on a different part of NM a few days ago, but think it deserves being incorporated here.
Clearly the forces behind PAD want a “new politics” that is more than getting rid of the “Thaksin regime.” They want to embed a form of “democracy” in Thailand that has its origins in Sarit’s time, when he used the word “prachathipatai” to define rule that was despotic and anything but democratic. Of course, there were appointed mebers of the assembly from the outset, but the debate was always over who got to appoint them. By the time Sarit came along and used the monarchy for his own legitimacy, the People’s Party was done and Pridi long in exile, so the conservative royalists of the time felt that they could take up this call and they propagandised it as a form of Thai-style democracy. Every time there is a debate about “revising” politics, appointed members comes back as does the suggestion of an appointed PM. PAD is just the tool of this kind of conservative politics.
The Nation (believe it or not!)
BETWEEN THE LINES
New politics but idea is not so fresh
Published on Jul 3, 2008
The People’s Alliance for Democracy has been flying kites to test the winds, suggesting “new politics” to replace electoral/representative democracy as it believes it is fighting a losing battle to get rid of corrupt politicians.
The inner circle of the street protesters’ group is seriously discussing its ultimate goal and blueprint for a new political scene. No clear ideology or platform has emerged so far.
To many of them, electoral democracy is not the answer to removing corrupt politicians from power. If they managed to force the government of Samak Sundaravej, whom they regard as former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s proxy, to step down and call a new election, the same political faces would win at the polls again, perhaps in higher numbers than before.
Even during the military regime, the People Power Party was able to defeat many other parties in favour with the junta. There’s little doubt about how many members the party would get in the next election to be held while it is in power.
PAD coordinator Suriyasai Katasila came up with the idea of new politics, apparently not his own, suggesting a mixed model to bring lawmakers into parliament. The proportion between elected MPs and selected MPs should be 30:70, he said.
It is not a completely new idea – such a system is currently being run in the Senate where half the 150 members come from elections and the other half are selected by a judge-led panel. Thailand has two kinds of senator: one has a people’s mandate from elections and the other represents the elite.
The idea of new politics has not yet come into wide public discussion but political activists and PAD critics who have been closely following the street protests said the idea of new politics would be a great leap backwards from democracy.
The groups who pushed Suriyasai to float the idea represent the elite. They actually want aristocracy, rather than democracy, to run the country. Like the current Senate, the elite, mostly in the bureaucracy and judicial areas, hope to preserve the right to pick their associates to control politics.
The military coup in September 2006 allowed the elite to swallow half the Senate but failed to take any bite in the Lower House. PAD’s second round of battle is another attempt to take a big stake. Let’s see – perhaps the second bite will be too big to chew.
Crikey Frank, you mean you’ve never read any literature on corruption? On Thailand, why not begin with the famous book by Pasuk and her colleagues on Corruption, published a few years ago, but still available.
By the way, I’m not sure New Mandala is trying to be the new Mandela, especially as the old one is still alive and active.
Daniel Pedersen, what’s that got to do with the price of fish? Have they signposted you wrong? It wasn’t the first battle and it’s not gonna be the last.
Back to topic, anecdotally albeit this involved the former first family, Sandar Win, under house arrest and the favourite daughter of the late strongman Ne Win, also an army doctor herself, failed her English language exam to get into a UK postgraduate programme. She was the one who tried to step into her father’s shoes whereas the others did not. Two other daughters, also doctors, not by the same mother, had settled in the UK, and Sandar’s brother Phyo left to live and work abroad for Schlumberger even earlier. Maybe it was the difference in experience, maybe just their personalities differ. They certainly were all privileged.
Even the so-called boat people may be regarded the lucky ones since they can afford a passage thanks to their savings or a loan, unlike the majority. It could all end in tears however like the Chinese who suffocated in a truck at Dover, the Burmese en route to Thailand more recently, or the Chinese that drowned in Morecombe Bay picking cockles.
I’d say the devil’s spawn deserve no benefit of the doubt so long as their own people are denied a decent basic education – a fundamental right, let alone other life opportunities.
[…] bring the elected government down. Their agenda is to campaign for a perverted form of democracy-“sufficiency democracy”-in which representation is achieved by appointment. Their agenda is to impose a minority […]
[…] a vigorous no-confidence debate in parliament, during which the opposition was said to have “chopped up” Samak and his cabinet colleagues. On the back of the PA(S)D protests the media have been […]
[…] ongoing rally of the People’s Alliance for (Sufficiency) Democracy (PASD) in Bangkok demonstrates the power of this form of political protest. In the face […]
I’m living in the US now and interested to have a chance to read either the book in Thai or English version or both. I don’t mind up loading the big file if anyone has it in and E-book form.
Back in 1990, when I was in College in the north of Thailand,I used to read bunch of thick books from the library about the death of prince Ananda. I remember taking the books back to the dorm and read them out loud to my friends.
Thanks in advance for any of you who would be able to help me out.
many instances we see as ‘human rights violations’, many people – often more numerous than us – see as justified or justifiable.
May I ask how the government’s actions in the Tak Bai incident is seen by the “more numerous” people as justified?
Thaksin and Samak have already justified it by saying that it was the protesters’ own fault for having fasted.
I guess another justification could be that these protesters were just a bunch of Muslim villagers and therefore don’t deserve proper and humane treatment by the authorities. Even if 78 die as a result of such treatment, it is justified.
Care to share with us any other justifications for human rights violations against the minority which the “more numerous” people may have?
And you also suggest that the Tak Bai victims and their surviving families and friends only deserve to have their ordeal remedied by the polls? And if the people/criminals who are responsible for the atrocities get acquitted by the “more numerous” voters, then that should be the end of the story? This is what you call justice?
The fact that Thaksin and Co. have not been made accountable for Tak Bai, Kru Sae, war on drugs, and have gotten away with corruption, abuse of power, tax evasion, etc is overwhelming evidence of a democracy that wasn’t functioning. But that isn’t surprising given that government’s dedication to dismantling of checks and balances within the system. It is therefore not surprising either that many people supported the coup as it seemed to be the only way of bringing these criminals to justice.
On Sunday (June 29) at dusk rebel fighters of the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) unloaded guns from the back of a pickup.
The guns were destined for Burma and were leaving Thai territory.
They will be used to fight soldiers of Burma’s ruling military junta.
The guns were run in a two-pickup convoy from south of Mae Sot to north of Mae Sariang.
One of guerilla group’s lieutenants spoke of his army’s desperate bid to stop construction of three major hydropower projects along the wild and untamed Salween River.
“We have to stop construction of these dams, we must stop them,” said one of Colonel Nerdah Mya’s aides, Timu.
Timu is a soldier of the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA), the armed wing of the Karen National Union political bloc formed in 1947 and holding out against the overwhelming military force of Burma’s ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC).
The SPDC troops number about 500,000, the KNLA about 10,000.
The dams will create vast reservoirs that will inundate lands the KNLA calls its own.
Building the dams is a win-win scenario for the SPDC generals.
The hydropower that is produced will be sold across the border in Thailand, generating revenue for an incredibly rich elite military class.
And territory friendly to the rebels who fight their soldiers will be rendered impassable.
As the Salween bloats lands friendly to the rebels, weeks of walking will be added to journeys traversing thick jungle paths that now take a day.
The Salween River is home to more than 7,000 species of plants and 80 rare or endangered animals and fish.
UNESCO says it “may be the most biologically diverse temperate ecosystem in the world”.
It was designated a World Heritage Site in 2003.
Slave labour is being used to build the dams.
Maps from the Thailand Burmese Border Consortium (TBBC) show locations of forced relocation encampments where terrified and displaced villagers have been corralled.
They are all clustered around major infrastructure projects the generals oversee as they gather wealth incomprehensible to just about any Burmese citizen.
At gunpoint, the population of these camps is forced to labour, working to build dams that will flood their former homes and possibly drown their aspirations of independence.
The TBBC’s Leonard Buckles believes the Salween dams may well be the end for the Karen and their fight.
“The political wing is dead,” he said, in the Thai-Burma frontier town of Mae Sot.
Mr Buckles believes his organisation’s donors are more likely to support action inside Burma, dealing directly with the generals to try and force political and military reform while still providing humanitarian aid to those who need it most.
Australian Chris Clifford, a field worker for the TBBC, sighs as he speaks of ‘donor fatigue’ and the reduced calorie counts being allotted to displaced people seeking refuge in Thailand.
He says funding is gradually being withdrawn from the camps and one day soon there will be nothing to sustain people who have languished in the camps for almost a quarter of a century.
Mr Buckles speaks of exit strategies for donors, tired by the intransigence of the SPDC generals.
Yet some of the refugee camps’ residents were born in limbo, and have known nothing else other than boredom and pregnancy.
After delivery of the guns on Sunday night, the Karen soldiers sang sorrowful war songs as we made our way home, safe on Thai territory.
Less than four hours after our arrival in the Thai frontier town of Mae Sot, at about 1am, to the south all hell had broken loose.
A pitched battle lasting all of this week (from June 30 until July 6) between soldiers of Burma’s ruling military junta and the Karen National Liberation Army had left scores dead.
There has been a significant escalation in fighting between units of Burma’s State Peace and Development Council and soldiers of the KNLA opposite the northern Thailand province of Tak.
A major push by the SPDC to take a long-standing base camp of the KNLA, the headquarters of its Sixth Brigade 201st battalion has been thwarted, for now.
The SPDC offensive to take Wah Lay Kee, launched from Thai territory, began at 5am Monday (June 30).
That the SPDC soldiers were prepared to intrude on Thai sovereignty is an indication of how determined they were to take the KNLA camp.
And they did.
But by evening they had lost it again, and 200 SPDC soldiers had been surrounded by four KNLA units of between 10 and 30 men.
The KNLA dug in close in heavy jungle, one group about 20 metres away from their enemies.
Both sides have taken heavy casualties as a result of landmines.
The fighting took place around a peninsula of Thai land that juts into Burma known as Phop Phra.
Phop Phra is an eccentricity of border demarcation between these two Southeast Asian nations.
The KNLA on Wednesday (July 2) seized a 50-calibre Browning machine-gun, the type usually mounted on top of armoured vehicles.
A 50-calibre Browning can cut buildings to pieces.
Yesterday there were 50 SPDC soldiers dead, including the commander of Light Infantry Battalion 410, Aung May Zaw.
While the SPDC took responsibility for Monday’s initial assault, light units of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army, a slave militia, eventually backed them.
Mae Sot General Hospital, on Thai territory, is today full of casualties from all sides.
Yesterday morning (Friday, July 4), three DKBA soldiers stepped on landmines and two SPDC soldiers were shot, but not killed.
All sides in this protracted conflict use landmines extensively
There were dead on both sides just hours after the SPDC launched the offensive against Wah Lay Kee on Monday morning (June 30).
By the next day 16 SPDC soldiers were dead, 13 had fled to Thailand and were in the hands of the Thai military.
A KNLA soldier was dead, two wounded and soldiers of the DKBA and KNLA soldiers were lying in beds close to one another at Mae Sot General Hospital, eyeing each other off.
One porter, seized at gunpoint from a nearby village by SPDC troops, had his leg amputated in the same hospital, another innocent victim of the world’s longest-running insurgency.
This latest battle, the heaviest of recent months, constitutes a major diplomatic incident.
On Wednesday evening (July 2), senior Thai army officials attempted mediation between the KNLA, SPDC and DKBA, but to no avail.
On Thursday night (July 3) Aung May Zaw, the overseer of a mortar unit essentially rendered useless because KNLA guerillas were so close to the SPDC units, was killed by KNLA snipers using AK RPDs.
This does not augur well for mediation.
On Friday (July 4) afternoon the KNLA were re-supplied with M-79 grenades and RPGs for their ageing weapons and were preparing to defend their precarious position in their bid for independence that began in 1949.
ENDS
Interesting too, isn’t it, that the Hong Pang Group, leaders of an armed ethnic insurgency arising from such a backwater region as the Wa state, now has so much reach and clout in the national economy investing their ill-gotten gains once they’ve made a deal with the junta, when the people they are supposed to represent, the Wa tribe, have not reaped any of the benefits to any significant extent. For the warlords of the Wa, violence has paid off.
The ruling class, even in tribal society, always believes their own interest is synonymous with the national interest. The Burmese junta, or any other ruling elite for that matter anywhere in the world, is no exception. Trickle-down, if that really happens to a significant degree, seems to be the least they can do for their own people. Alas, many just don’t bother. Globalisation in its present form makes the gap between the haves and the have-nots exponentially wider, given the elite gaining better access to international capital but no change in the political will to better the lives of ordinary people.
So we’ll just wait patiently for evolutionary processes to take their course while the world comes to an agreement to improve the generals by association, hoping that it will rub off on them, by doing business with them, getting a piece of the action for everyone, all snouts together in the trough, and calling it pragmatism. Hooray!
Well Andrew, I for one agree with you. Perhaps you are naive. While there is no doubt quality education yields fantastic potential. You are suggesting these children have never had time for “self-reflection”? They are well past that age when they get to you, despite what you may conclude by observing college age behavior.
While education CAN lead to a higher sense of moral justice, it has never stopped the corrupt and those seeking to exploit others more informed about how to go about doing just that.
But than again, if you think yourself such a fantastic instructor that you can overpower such family influence (you do know we are talking aout the Burma junta right?), by all means – why aren’t you healing the sick and raising the dead?
Sorry, perhaps that went too far. But seriously, please enlighten us who know a little about education on just how you could pull such a feat off.
I’m a little lost for words that you would public with such a statement.
I do in deed share you faith in education, perhaps you should have left it at that.
Besides, I fully agree with burmaeconomicwatch. No university should accept blood money. But we are a long way from getting to a sense a moral justice when it comes to that aren’t we? We still separate ourselves from the realities of globalization – including the most educated among us.
You have touched upon the beginning of a vast topic. I’m stopping here.
Try saying what you say to a Tak Bai mother. See if she thinks its acceptable.
Where did you learn reasoning and arguing politics? From FOX News? Such cliche!
More seriously, as I said above and you’re unable to reply:
Just ask, or better still, campaign, for the people behind 6 Tula to be subjected to the same kind of rules, practices, elective politicians have to (and without state propaganda of their supposed greatness, etc.). Then if they can win general elections, I’ll be the first to say “too bad…” (and continue campaign for their removal in next general elections).
btw. a ‘related’ case, I met wife of Somchai Nilaphijit not long ago in a seminar and had arguments with her, not different in substance, but certainly less cliche, than your ‘suggestion’ above, that her problems with Thaksin cannont justify her support of royalist coup to topple Thaksin. etc.
I’ve just got home from a day-long seminar, on 6 Tula and the arts (there’s going to be exibition by 4 artists on 6 Tula next month, prompted, perhaps more than any other cause, Samak’s remark on the number of dead.) I haven’t had time to read all the above. So let me just make a few quick responses.
Begining with the silliest one.
The pretended ‘grass root- lower class’ person, otherwise known as “Taxi Driver”
This is also true, really. I’ve just collected on my bet that my #15 will elicit a verbal vomit from Somsak. The recipe is simple: just mention 6 Tula but do so without condemning YOU KNOW WHO, then sit back and watch the cat go nuts. meoooowwww!!!
Actually I feel vindicated that you really are stupid. After all these years and at this level of discussion, to “mention 6 Tula but do so without condemning YOU KNOW WHO” and you think this should not be a cause for outrage? Only a person of shamelessness and stupidity could think of this as something to apologise for or “audit thinking”. I really have nothing to add to such person. Such person will be, in all likelyhood, unable to distinquish between grass and rice anyway. So a rational argument or moral outrage is beyond reach for him. (Btw. does anyone notice that the key point that I said previously about the similarity/differnce between such incidents as Tak bai and 6 Tula goes unanswered by this person. The only thing he cable of is to put something I DIDN’T SAY at all in my mouth: Please just cite dierectly where I said “we have to accept human rights violations because “many people, often more numerous than us – see as as justified…” Well, if you cannot argue the point without lying what I said, perhaps you should stop writing lies?
When does “to accept outcome of general elections, i.e., democratic decision arrived at by majority of people who don’t share your view”, become “to accept incidents like Tak bai”? Umm.. perhaps, when one couldn’t distinquish between grass and rice? (Lucky for me, I still can so distinquish!)
Also anyone who can only shouts slogan like “we don’t accept either 6 Tula or Tak bai”, but could not make a historical analysis of the differentia specifica of each, perhaps should stay on grass?
To “Fed Up”:
I really don’t understand why you feel you have to write under names other than your real one, since I know, and I presume many here know, who you are.
Anyway, you write such a long comment and I’m too tired to response to all the points at the moment. So let me just pick one at ramdom. This is the one you’ve made many, many times already:
(I’ll break up your passage here and put (a) and (b) to them for convenience of my response, even though they are closely realted.)
(a)The fact is also that many people under his criticism did many things against the royalist coup more than he knows, but they didn’t do it in the media or the webboards Somsak read or and did not notify Somsak for what they did (why do they have to?). Once he doesn’t know, it means those actions did not exist and those people “failed to do” because of their incorrect political views.
(b)Even if they did not say or write anything at all, how/why should we jump to a conclusion about their political views for what they did not do. It is true that sometimes silence is an expression. But we should not abuse this notion to discredit other people too easily.
Perhaps it is I who should be ‘fed up’ with this repeated ‘argument’
(a) PLEAE, FOR ONCE, give example of people who “did many things against the royalist coup” that I didn’t know and criticize unfairly. Please.
(b) I never, as far as I can remember, criticize/discredit people simply they didn’t say or write anything about the royalist coup. I’m surprised that with your ability, you should still make such silly retort. I said a number of times, but even if I didn’t say it you should well know, that my close family, relatives, virtually all of my departmental colleagues didn’t say anything about the coup. Did I ever criticise them? But, yes, I criticize (or “discredit” in your words) people who didn’t say anything about the royalist coup if they
(1) over the years often came out to criticise elective government/ politicians in harshest possible terms and a lot of time basing their criticism on royalist politics Rangsan Thanaphornphan comes to mind with his “р╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╕нр╕▒р╕Ыр╕гр╕╡р╕вр╣М” and “р╕Йр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╕▓р╕бр╕Хр╕┤р╕Бр╕гр╕╕р╕Зр╣Ар╕Чр╕Ю”
(2) more importantly I criticise (“discridit”) people who just few months ago were so eager to topple Thaksin, with big claims like ‘democracy’, etc.
I make no apology in either case. In fact it is you, in my view, who still have a case to answer : why are you so keen to provide a defence for these people, quite often “better-looking” defence than they could themselve offer!? (The latest one being a defence of Nakkharin to the effect that he was constrained by the LM law he produced such garbage as his book on the monarchy. If he really felt so constrained, with his status and ability, couldn’t he said so himself? Is there anywhere that he ever express his opinion that LM should be abolished? (or even reform?)
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
The Thai state: doing some things right
Tension between posters. Yes! It goes like this. Some folks want to protect the status quo because it has been good to them. And they can envisage no other reality. Others are prepared to ignore the Thaksin TRT PPP negatives because when you’re in business you have to forge alliances regardless of whether you truly feel comfortable with them. Still others don’t really have an investment in either side and are quite prepared to sit and observe the two interests slug it out. One may not have a gun, but even the apparently passive observer has his anger at how the other two have the gall to try and monopolise everything that moves. My guess is some here are in a position where they have to take sides to protect their considerable investments of money, time and energy in this country. It isn’t pleasant to have to admit you have been laboring for years in vain. Which is why they have to pull off the hoary old commie-kicking stunt of calling somebody a PAD supporter.
Fantasy! I don’t think so! People don’t react to things so vigorously without some sort of reason. My reason is taking the occasional puff at those who think they their business is all that matters. It helps to relieve the tension.
Time to go home
If the PAD is going down that less democratic path, it seemed like a missed opportunity. They have done much in this new Thai phenomena of civic ultra-assertiveness and should continue to fight for, as they have in past occasions, against corruption, for political accountability, checks-and-balances…etc… They should especially advocate for the rule of law and set a good example by following the court’s order.
Is this a fear that, post-Thaksin (if the courts “do their job”), they’ll be no defining figure that generate so much emotion and political activism!? Hence the need to advocate elite control ‘sufficiency’ democracy – as Andrew terms it – which interestingly mirrors the ‘sufficiency’ rural constitution he blogged on recently (which is, at the end of the day, politics controlled by the capitalist-gangster elite). On that note, maybe PAD should take this new civic-assertiveness to the rural areas. If the country eventually gets a strong farmers’ political representation in parliament, even a truly, grass-roots farmer political party – that could be a truly new milestone in Thai democracy.
Ji Ungpakorn on the “carnival of reaction”
AjarnSomsak, 6 Tula 1976 is historically enmeshed in the United State’s global “containment” policy against Communism and the Thai State is formally backed by US intelligence (of whatever quality) and military aid in this war (as was the then South Vietnam government, Suharto etc.). As we know, millions have perished in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Indonesia etc. (I don’t know how many died in Thailand but as you compared Takbai etc. with Iraq, it probably pales in comparison to the broader war). In fact, monarchies (tied to their respective ‘state’) in Laos and Cambodia were dismantled as a result of this war. The Thai State (tied in with her own the monarchy) survived this war – clearly to your disappointment (and many others who devised the “Domino Theory” – but one only to delve into South East Asia’s colonial history, and the effects of “divide-and-rule” policy, to understand why).
Hence, my position that 1973, 1976, 1992, War on Drugs, Kruesue, Takbai, Sabah-Yoi are all state abuses, albeit under different and specific historical, political contexts . They are all injustices and it is hoped they are all redressed in some way in the present-future.
I understand that 6 Tula holds a very special place for you tied closely with your republican objectives for Thailand. From those analytical frames, everyone elses’ views is obviously “stupid”. Admittedly my views are framed by my own un-networked critical monarchist mindset.
Alan Rabinowitz in The Myanmar Times
It is rather interesting that Rabinowitz’s approach is still traditional human-less appraoch. I have been following forest conservation in Burma. Rabinowitz hasn’t been able to realize the importance of human survival, but he is only talking about the numbers of tigers. Zoa Noam’s articles in the Irrawaddy and elsewhere are good critiques of Ranbinowitz.
Burmese exiles are no different either. Arguments made by the exiles against conservation is that it generates revenue for the generals. But they rarely talk about the negative impacts of such conservation on local communities.
Farewell to the idiot son
While not an Australian citizen, I was a resident there during Howard’s final term and got the opportunity to hear Michael Wesley from Griffith University present his (at the time) latest book The Howard Paradox: Australian Diplomacy in Asia 1996-2006 in which he argued that despite all expectations Australian Foreign Policy under Howard/Downer was not as disastrous as most had expected. He cited some items along the lines of Grasshoper’s points #s 1-3. He also noted that many Asians whose perspectives he surveyed still thought that the White Australia policy was still standing but that that this didn’t seem to actually cause any ripple to Australian foreign policy. It did seem at the time that he was using a narrow frame of Liberal Party values to assess the Howard/Downer foreign policy achievements. However, it may simply be that whether or not Downer did achieve anything depends on whether one shares Downer’s (Liberal Party) values and foreign policy aims.
Time to go home
I did post this article (appended below) on a different part of NM a few days ago, but think it deserves being incorporated here.
Clearly the forces behind PAD want a “new politics” that is more than getting rid of the “Thaksin regime.” They want to embed a form of “democracy” in Thailand that has its origins in Sarit’s time, when he used the word “prachathipatai” to define rule that was despotic and anything but democratic. Of course, there were appointed mebers of the assembly from the outset, but the debate was always over who got to appoint them. By the time Sarit came along and used the monarchy for his own legitimacy, the People’s Party was done and Pridi long in exile, so the conservative royalists of the time felt that they could take up this call and they propagandised it as a form of Thai-style democracy. Every time there is a debate about “revising” politics, appointed members comes back as does the suggestion of an appointed PM. PAD is just the tool of this kind of conservative politics.
The Nation (believe it or not!)
BETWEEN THE LINES
New politics but idea is not so fresh
Published on Jul 3, 2008
The People’s Alliance for Democracy has been flying kites to test the winds, suggesting “new politics” to replace electoral/representative democracy as it believes it is fighting a losing battle to get rid of corrupt politicians.
The inner circle of the street protesters’ group is seriously discussing its ultimate goal and blueprint for a new political scene. No clear ideology or platform has emerged so far.
To many of them, electoral democracy is not the answer to removing corrupt politicians from power. If they managed to force the government of Samak Sundaravej, whom they regard as former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s proxy, to step down and call a new election, the same political faces would win at the polls again, perhaps in higher numbers than before.
Even during the military regime, the People Power Party was able to defeat many other parties in favour with the junta. There’s little doubt about how many members the party would get in the next election to be held while it is in power.
PAD coordinator Suriyasai Katasila came up with the idea of new politics, apparently not his own, suggesting a mixed model to bring lawmakers into parliament. The proportion between elected MPs and selected MPs should be 30:70, he said.
It is not a completely new idea – such a system is currently being run in the Senate where half the 150 members come from elections and the other half are selected by a judge-led panel. Thailand has two kinds of senator: one has a people’s mandate from elections and the other represents the elite.
The idea of new politics has not yet come into wide public discussion but political activists and PAD critics who have been closely following the street protests said the idea of new politics would be a great leap backwards from democracy.
The groups who pushed Suriyasai to float the idea represent the elite. They actually want aristocracy, rather than democracy, to run the country. Like the current Senate, the elite, mostly in the bureaucracy and judicial areas, hope to preserve the right to pick their associates to control politics.
The military coup in September 2006 allowed the elite to swallow half the Senate but failed to take any bite in the Lower House. PAD’s second round of battle is another attempt to take a big stake. Let’s see – perhaps the second bite will be too big to chew.
The Thai state: doing some things right
Crikey Frank, you mean you’ve never read any literature on corruption? On Thailand, why not begin with the famous book by Pasuk and her colleagues on Corruption, published a few years ago, but still available.
By the way, I’m not sure New Mandala is trying to be the new Mandela, especially as the old one is still alive and active.
The Thai state: doing some things right
Thanks for the numbers. Why is there so much tension between the commenters?
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Daniel Pedersen, what’s that got to do with the price of fish? Have they signposted you wrong? It wasn’t the first battle and it’s not gonna be the last.
Back to topic, anecdotally albeit this involved the former first family, Sandar Win, under house arrest and the favourite daughter of the late strongman Ne Win, also an army doctor herself, failed her English language exam to get into a UK postgraduate programme. She was the one who tried to step into her father’s shoes whereas the others did not. Two other daughters, also doctors, not by the same mother, had settled in the UK, and Sandar’s brother Phyo left to live and work abroad for Schlumberger even earlier. Maybe it was the difference in experience, maybe just their personalities differ. They certainly were all privileged.
Even the so-called boat people may be regarded the lucky ones since they can afford a passage thanks to their savings or a loan, unlike the majority. It could all end in tears however like the Chinese who suffocated in a truck at Dover, the Burmese en route to Thailand more recently, or the Chinese that drowned in Morecombe Bay picking cockles.
I’d say the devil’s spawn deserve no benefit of the doubt so long as their own people are denied a decent basic education – a fundamental right, let alone other life opportunities.
Sufficiency democracy
[…] bring the elected government down. Their agenda is to campaign for a perverted form of democracy-“sufficiency democracy”-in which representation is achieved by appointment. Their agenda is to impose a minority […]
“Samak’s government has no ability to shape public opinion”
[…] a vigorous no-confidence debate in parliament, during which the opposition was said to have “chopped up” Samak and his cabinet colleagues. On the back of the PA(S)D protests the media have been […]
Leave the PA(S)D alone!
[…] ongoing rally of the People’s Alliance for (Sufficiency) Democracy (PASD) in Bangkok demonstrates the power of this form of political protest. In the face […]
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
Cali–Just email me your postal address & I’ll post you a disk.
facthaiATgmailDOTcom
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
I’m living in the US now and interested to have a chance to read either the book in Thai or English version or both. I don’t mind up loading the big file if anyone has it in and E-book form.
Back in 1990, when I was in College in the north of Thailand,I used to read bunch of thick books from the library about the death of prince Ananda. I remember taking the books back to the dorm and read them out loud to my friends.
Thanks in advance for any of you who would be able to help me out.
Ji Ungpakorn on the “carnival of reaction”
re #9
many instances we see as ‘human rights violations’, many people – often more numerous than us – see as justified or justifiable.
May I ask how the government’s actions in the Tak Bai incident is seen by the “more numerous” people as justified?
Thaksin and Samak have already justified it by saying that it was the protesters’ own fault for having fasted.
I guess another justification could be that these protesters were just a bunch of Muslim villagers and therefore don’t deserve proper and humane treatment by the authorities. Even if 78 die as a result of such treatment, it is justified.
Care to share with us any other justifications for human rights violations against the minority which the “more numerous” people may have?
And you also suggest that the Tak Bai victims and their surviving families and friends only deserve to have their ordeal remedied by the polls? And if the people/criminals who are responsible for the atrocities get acquitted by the “more numerous” voters, then that should be the end of the story? This is what you call justice?
The fact that Thaksin and Co. have not been made accountable for Tak Bai, Kru Sae, war on drugs, and have gotten away with corruption, abuse of power, tax evasion, etc is overwhelming evidence of a democracy that wasn’t functioning. But that isn’t surprising given that government’s dedication to dismantling of checks and balances within the system. It is therefore not surprising either that many people supported the coup as it seemed to be the only way of bringing these criminals to justice.
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Karen State, Burma
On Sunday (June 29) at dusk rebel fighters of the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) unloaded guns from the back of a pickup.
The guns were destined for Burma and were leaving Thai territory.
They will be used to fight soldiers of Burma’s ruling military junta.
The guns were run in a two-pickup convoy from south of Mae Sot to north of Mae Sariang.
One of guerilla group’s lieutenants spoke of his army’s desperate bid to stop construction of three major hydropower projects along the wild and untamed Salween River.
“We have to stop construction of these dams, we must stop them,” said one of Colonel Nerdah Mya’s aides, Timu.
Timu is a soldier of the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA), the armed wing of the Karen National Union political bloc formed in 1947 and holding out against the overwhelming military force of Burma’s ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC).
The SPDC troops number about 500,000, the KNLA about 10,000.
The dams will create vast reservoirs that will inundate lands the KNLA calls its own.
Building the dams is a win-win scenario for the SPDC generals.
The hydropower that is produced will be sold across the border in Thailand, generating revenue for an incredibly rich elite military class.
And territory friendly to the rebels who fight their soldiers will be rendered impassable.
As the Salween bloats lands friendly to the rebels, weeks of walking will be added to journeys traversing thick jungle paths that now take a day.
The Salween River is home to more than 7,000 species of plants and 80 rare or endangered animals and fish.
UNESCO says it “may be the most biologically diverse temperate ecosystem in the world”.
It was designated a World Heritage Site in 2003.
Slave labour is being used to build the dams.
Maps from the Thailand Burmese Border Consortium (TBBC) show locations of forced relocation encampments where terrified and displaced villagers have been corralled.
They are all clustered around major infrastructure projects the generals oversee as they gather wealth incomprehensible to just about any Burmese citizen.
At gunpoint, the population of these camps is forced to labour, working to build dams that will flood their former homes and possibly drown their aspirations of independence.
The TBBC’s Leonard Buckles believes the Salween dams may well be the end for the Karen and their fight.
“The political wing is dead,” he said, in the Thai-Burma frontier town of Mae Sot.
Mr Buckles believes his organisation’s donors are more likely to support action inside Burma, dealing directly with the generals to try and force political and military reform while still providing humanitarian aid to those who need it most.
Australian Chris Clifford, a field worker for the TBBC, sighs as he speaks of ‘donor fatigue’ and the reduced calorie counts being allotted to displaced people seeking refuge in Thailand.
He says funding is gradually being withdrawn from the camps and one day soon there will be nothing to sustain people who have languished in the camps for almost a quarter of a century.
Mr Buckles speaks of exit strategies for donors, tired by the intransigence of the SPDC generals.
Yet some of the refugee camps’ residents were born in limbo, and have known nothing else other than boredom and pregnancy.
After delivery of the guns on Sunday night, the Karen soldiers sang sorrowful war songs as we made our way home, safe on Thai territory.
Less than four hours after our arrival in the Thai frontier town of Mae Sot, at about 1am, to the south all hell had broken loose.
A pitched battle lasting all of this week (from June 30 until July 6) between soldiers of Burma’s ruling military junta and the Karen National Liberation Army had left scores dead.
There has been a significant escalation in fighting between units of Burma’s State Peace and Development Council and soldiers of the KNLA opposite the northern Thailand province of Tak.
A major push by the SPDC to take a long-standing base camp of the KNLA, the headquarters of its Sixth Brigade 201st battalion has been thwarted, for now.
The SPDC offensive to take Wah Lay Kee, launched from Thai territory, began at 5am Monday (June 30).
That the SPDC soldiers were prepared to intrude on Thai sovereignty is an indication of how determined they were to take the KNLA camp.
And they did.
But by evening they had lost it again, and 200 SPDC soldiers had been surrounded by four KNLA units of between 10 and 30 men.
The KNLA dug in close in heavy jungle, one group about 20 metres away from their enemies.
Both sides have taken heavy casualties as a result of landmines.
The fighting took place around a peninsula of Thai land that juts into Burma known as Phop Phra.
Phop Phra is an eccentricity of border demarcation between these two Southeast Asian nations.
The KNLA on Wednesday (July 2) seized a 50-calibre Browning machine-gun, the type usually mounted on top of armoured vehicles.
A 50-calibre Browning can cut buildings to pieces.
Yesterday there were 50 SPDC soldiers dead, including the commander of Light Infantry Battalion 410, Aung May Zaw.
While the SPDC took responsibility for Monday’s initial assault, light units of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army, a slave militia, eventually backed them.
Mae Sot General Hospital, on Thai territory, is today full of casualties from all sides.
Yesterday morning (Friday, July 4), three DKBA soldiers stepped on landmines and two SPDC soldiers were shot, but not killed.
All sides in this protracted conflict use landmines extensively
There were dead on both sides just hours after the SPDC launched the offensive against Wah Lay Kee on Monday morning (June 30).
By the next day 16 SPDC soldiers were dead, 13 had fled to Thailand and were in the hands of the Thai military.
A KNLA soldier was dead, two wounded and soldiers of the DKBA and KNLA soldiers were lying in beds close to one another at Mae Sot General Hospital, eyeing each other off.
One porter, seized at gunpoint from a nearby village by SPDC troops, had his leg amputated in the same hospital, another innocent victim of the world’s longest-running insurgency.
This latest battle, the heaviest of recent months, constitutes a major diplomatic incident.
On Wednesday evening (July 2), senior Thai army officials attempted mediation between the KNLA, SPDC and DKBA, but to no avail.
On Thursday night (July 3) Aung May Zaw, the overseer of a mortar unit essentially rendered useless because KNLA guerillas were so close to the SPDC units, was killed by KNLA snipers using AK RPDs.
This does not augur well for mediation.
On Friday (July 4) afternoon the KNLA were re-supplied with M-79 grenades and RPGs for their ageing weapons and were preparing to defend their precarious position in their bid for independence that began in 1949.
ENDS
Ashley South on post-cyclone Burma
Interesting too, isn’t it, that the Hong Pang Group, leaders of an armed ethnic insurgency arising from such a backwater region as the Wa state, now has so much reach and clout in the national economy investing their ill-gotten gains once they’ve made a deal with the junta, when the people they are supposed to represent, the Wa tribe, have not reaped any of the benefits to any significant extent. For the warlords of the Wa, violence has paid off.
The ruling class, even in tribal society, always believes their own interest is synonymous with the national interest. The Burmese junta, or any other ruling elite for that matter anywhere in the world, is no exception. Trickle-down, if that really happens to a significant degree, seems to be the least they can do for their own people. Alas, many just don’t bother. Globalisation in its present form makes the gap between the haves and the have-nots exponentially wider, given the elite gaining better access to international capital but no change in the political will to better the lives of ordinary people.
So we’ll just wait patiently for evolutionary processes to take their course while the world comes to an agreement to improve the generals by association, hoping that it will rub off on them, by doing business with them, getting a piece of the action for everyone, all snouts together in the trough, and calling it pragmatism. Hooray!
Time for AusAID to rethink Burma
Well Andrew, I for one agree with you. Perhaps you are naive. While there is no doubt quality education yields fantastic potential. You are suggesting these children have never had time for “self-reflection”? They are well past that age when they get to you, despite what you may conclude by observing college age behavior.
While education CAN lead to a higher sense of moral justice, it has never stopped the corrupt and those seeking to exploit others more informed about how to go about doing just that.
But than again, if you think yourself such a fantastic instructor that you can overpower such family influence (you do know we are talking aout the Burma junta right?), by all means – why aren’t you healing the sick and raising the dead?
Sorry, perhaps that went too far. But seriously, please enlighten us who know a little about education on just how you could pull such a feat off.
I’m a little lost for words that you would public with such a statement.
I do in deed share you faith in education, perhaps you should have left it at that.
Besides, I fully agree with burmaeconomicwatch. No university should accept blood money. But we are a long way from getting to a sense a moral justice when it comes to that aren’t we? We still separate ourselves from the realities of globalization – including the most educated among us.
You have touched upon the beginning of a vast topic. I’m stopping here.
Ji Ungpakorn on the “carnival of reaction”
P.S. I couldn’t resist a few words on this:
Try saying what you say to a Tak Bai mother. See if she thinks its acceptable.
Where did you learn reasoning and arguing politics? From FOX News? Such cliche!
More seriously, as I said above and you’re unable to reply:
Just ask, or better still, campaign, for the people behind 6 Tula to be subjected to the same kind of rules, practices, elective politicians have to (and without state propaganda of their supposed greatness, etc.). Then if they can win general elections, I’ll be the first to say “too bad…” (and continue campaign for their removal in next general elections).
btw. a ‘related’ case, I met wife of Somchai Nilaphijit not long ago in a seminar and had arguments with her, not different in substance, but certainly less cliche, than your ‘suggestion’ above, that her problems with Thaksin cannont justify her support of royalist coup to topple Thaksin. etc.
Ji Ungpakorn on the “carnival of reaction”
I’ve just got home from a day-long seminar, on 6 Tula and the arts (there’s going to be exibition by 4 artists on 6 Tula next month, prompted, perhaps more than any other cause, Samak’s remark on the number of dead.) I haven’t had time to read all the above. So let me just make a few quick responses.
Begining with the silliest one.
The pretended ‘grass root- lower class’ person, otherwise known as “Taxi Driver”
This is also true, really. I’ve just collected on my bet that my #15 will elicit a verbal vomit from Somsak. The recipe is simple: just mention 6 Tula but do so without condemning YOU KNOW WHO, then sit back and watch the cat go nuts. meoooowwww!!!
Actually I feel vindicated that you really are stupid. After all these years and at this level of discussion, to “mention 6 Tula but do so without condemning YOU KNOW WHO” and you think this should not be a cause for outrage? Only a person of shamelessness and stupidity could think of this as something to apologise for or “audit thinking”. I really have nothing to add to such person. Such person will be, in all likelyhood, unable to distinquish between grass and rice anyway. So a rational argument or moral outrage is beyond reach for him. (Btw. does anyone notice that the key point that I said previously about the similarity/differnce between such incidents as Tak bai and 6 Tula goes unanswered by this person. The only thing he cable of is to put something I DIDN’T SAY at all in my mouth: Please just cite dierectly where I said “we have to accept human rights violations because “many people, often more numerous than us – see as as justified…” Well, if you cannot argue the point without lying what I said, perhaps you should stop writing lies?
When does “to accept outcome of general elections, i.e., democratic decision arrived at by majority of people who don’t share your view”, become “to accept incidents like Tak bai”? Umm.. perhaps, when one couldn’t distinquish between grass and rice? (Lucky for me, I still can so distinquish!)
Also anyone who can only shouts slogan like “we don’t accept either 6 Tula or Tak bai”, but could not make a historical analysis of the differentia specifica of each, perhaps should stay on grass?
To “Fed Up”:
I really don’t understand why you feel you have to write under names other than your real one, since I know, and I presume many here know, who you are.
Anyway, you write such a long comment and I’m too tired to response to all the points at the moment. So let me just pick one at ramdom. This is the one you’ve made many, many times already:
(I’ll break up your passage here and put (a) and (b) to them for convenience of my response, even though they are closely realted.)
(a)The fact is also that many people under his criticism did many things against the royalist coup more than he knows, but they didn’t do it in the media or the webboards Somsak read or and did not notify Somsak for what they did (why do they have to?). Once he doesn’t know, it means those actions did not exist and those people “failed to do” because of their incorrect political views.
(b)Even if they did not say or write anything at all, how/why should we jump to a conclusion about their political views for what they did not do. It is true that sometimes silence is an expression. But we should not abuse this notion to discredit other people too easily.
Perhaps it is I who should be ‘fed up’ with this repeated ‘argument’
(a) PLEAE, FOR ONCE, give example of people who “did many things against the royalist coup” that I didn’t know and criticize unfairly. Please.
(b) I never, as far as I can remember, criticize/discredit people simply they didn’t say or write anything about the royalist coup. I’m surprised that with your ability, you should still make such silly retort. I said a number of times, but even if I didn’t say it you should well know, that my close family, relatives, virtually all of my departmental colleagues didn’t say anything about the coup. Did I ever criticise them? But, yes, I criticize (or “discredit” in your words) people who didn’t say anything about the royalist coup if they
(1) over the years often came out to criticise elective government/ politicians in harshest possible terms and a lot of time basing their criticism on royalist politics Rangsan Thanaphornphan comes to mind with his “р╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╕нр╕▒р╕Ыр╕гр╕╡р╕вр╣М” and “р╕Йр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╕▓р╕бр╕Хр╕┤р╕Бр╕гр╕╕р╕Зр╣Ар╕Чр╕Ю”
(2) more importantly I criticise (“discridit”) people who just few months ago were so eager to topple Thaksin, with big claims like ‘democracy’, etc.
I make no apology in either case. In fact it is you, in my view, who still have a case to answer : why are you so keen to provide a defence for these people, quite often “better-looking” defence than they could themselve offer!? (The latest one being a defence of Nakkharin to the effect that he was constrained by the LM law he produced such garbage as his book on the monarchy. If he really felt so constrained, with his status and ability, couldn’t he said so himself? Is there anywhere that he ever express his opinion that LM should be abolished? (or even reform?)
To be continued…